186 Conn. App. 224
Conn. App. Ct.2018Background
- 2006: Laura A. Stein executed an interest‑only note ($1,650,000) and she and Brian Stein executed a mortgage on property at 983 New Norwalk Rd.; payments stopped in July 2008 and loan went into default.
- Note endorsements: Countrywide → Countrywide Home Loans → endorsed in blank → Citibank (trustee) possessed a copy of the note; MERS assigned the mortgage to Citibank in 2009.
- Citibank commenced foreclosure in July 2009; Brian Stein filed defenses alleging Citibank lacked standing and that the original note/ownership chain was not proved.
- Trial occurred June 24–26, 2015; court heard the motion to dismiss for lack of standing together with the merits, credited Nationstar witness Nguyen that Citibank was holder when suit began and Nationstar was servicer in 2015.
- Postjudgment: defendant sought reargument/new trial and produced public records asserting Wilmington Trust had become trustee; court reopened the record for limited additional testimony, later allowed Wilmington Trust to be substituted as plaintiff and denied defendant’s postjudgment motions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standing / Motion to dismiss | Citibank (and later Wilmington Trust) was holder/trustee and had authority to foreclose; Nguyen’s testimony and note photocopy sufficed | Citibank lacked standing — was not owner/holder at suit commencement or at trial; pooling/servicing documents required | Court credited Nguyen and the note evidence: Citibank was holder when suit commenced; assignee may litigate in assignor’s name; standing established; denial of dismissal affirmed |
| Opening record for extra testimony | Court may take additional evidence to resolve jurisdictional challenges; Nationstar witness could clarify servicer/trustee identity | Reopening gave plaintiff a second bite and deprived defendant of discovery/due process | Court exercised discretion to reopen limited record to address jurisdictional claims; not an abuse; claim waived where defendant induced reopening |
| Consideration of defendant’s documents (posttrial) | Plaintiff: trial record and witness testimony were adequate; no obligation to admit extraneous public trust documents | Defendant: public records (Moody’s, Utah records) showed Wilmington Trust succeeded Citibank and cast doubt on standing/servicing | Claim inadequately briefed — appellant failed to identify record cites or legal analysis; issue not reviewed on appeal |
| Default / Mortgagor status | Plaintiff: both Laura and Brian are mortgagors per mortgage language; Laura stipulated default | Defendant: Laura was a non‑title owner and could not bind or default Brian | Laura stipulated the note was in default and signatures matched; Brian’s signature on mortgage not contested — Brian is mortgagor in default; claim fails |
| Burden under J.E. Robert (nonholder/transferee proof) | Plaintiff: presented witness testimony establishing holder/servicer status; documentary pooling agreement not required to make prima facie case | Defendant: plaintiff/servicer failed to prove transfer history and nonholder authority to bring suit | Court found plaintiff met J.E. Robert requirements by proving holder/servicer status via testimony and note possession; plaintiff satisfied burden to prosecute foreclosure |
Key Cases Cited
- J.E. Robert Co. v. Signature Properties, LLC, 309 Conn. 307 (Conn. 2013) (defines when nonholder/transferee or servicer may enforce note under UCC and § 49‑17)
- Equity One, Inc. v. Shivers, 310 Conn. 119 (Conn. 2013) (holder defined and effect of blank endorsement)
- Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Strong, 149 Conn. App. 384 (Conn. App. 2014) (securitization documents not required to make prima facie case of standing)
- Bank of America, N.A. v. Kydes, 183 Conn. App. 479 (Conn. App. 2018) (holder in possession of endorsed note establishes prima facie standing)
- Chase Home Finance, LLC v. Fequiere, 119 Conn. App. 570 (Conn. App. 2010) (§ 49‑17 and principle that mortgage follows the note)